Originally Posted by
ManaAdaSystem
Fuel contamination, engine problems, flight control problems, terrorism, instrument problems, birdstrike, suicide, runaway trim ? Nothing can be excluded, but ony one issue is discussed.
MCAS.
Have you looked at least to the most crude bits of information on this crash before climbing up the sope box?
Fuel contamination, engine problems => 383kts, Ultra high energy impact. Scrap it.
instrument problems: 383kts (read: no stall) and sunny, nice weather => WTF instrument should cause this??? I don't see a reasonable scenario for this.
bird strike: => why spearing along at 1000ft at ridiculous speeds after being hit by a bird??? That would be exactly opposite of what you would want to do: Higher altitude and low speed. IMHO not really supported from what we know so far.
I would accept flight control problems ( would be extremely worrying though on a just 5 month old aircraft of a new type!), suicide (but why would someone fly for so long at low altitude and high and increasing speed when he wants to commit suicide?), runaway trim (here we go -that is what has been mostly discussed and wehre there is a precedence).
So if I draw a line below your objection I still end up mostly with what is being discussed here (although I agree it is much to early to be sure it was MCAS).
Would I happily board a MAX tomorrow? Not if I could avoid it.